August 3, 2017

"Special counsel Robert Mueller has tapped a Washington grand jury for his Russia investigation..."

"... a key procedural step as he looks into potential collusion between President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia, three sources familiar with the investigation said," Politico reports.
"The White House favors anything that accelerates the conclusion of his work fairly,” Cobb said, noting the White House is “committed to fully cooperating” with Mueller....

“This is not an unusual move in a manner like this for Bob Mueller to move expeditiously through the process,” [said Trump attorney, Jay Sekulow].

53 comments:

sunsong said...

It's a crime to lie to a Grand Jury!

Birkel said...

5th Amendment.

AReasonableMan said...

Just business as usual then. Nothing to see here folks.

YoungHegelian said...

Can I have my NothingBurger with pepperjack cheese, onions, & bacon added, please?

Rabel said...

Article 2, Section 2.

mockturtle said...

I can't wait for the Wasserman-Schultz investigation!

The Cracker Emcee Activist said...

"Just business as usual then"

I pity the fool. In six months ARM will be howling in outrage about the partisan special counsels investigating Democrat malfeasance.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

I'm sure Mueller could get the grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, but what about a buttered roll?

But it will be necessary to turn off the TV news until this is over. It's going to be grand jury speculation v. why isn't Hillary being prosecuted from now until Christmas.

Feste said...

~
Maybe it’s a transgender grand jury?

I'll wait and see. On this one.

“Looking for a Lover that won’t blow my Cover.”

MadisonMan said...

"According to a source close to the Grand Jury"

How long before that phrase sees print?

Birkel said...

The average American adult commits three federal felonies a day. A committed prosecutor would have to try to avoid finding transgressions. If Mueller cannot secure an indictment, he is incompetent.

The answer, generally, is to disentangle the law and take power from Leviathan.

Matthew Sablan said...

"How long before that phrase sees print?"

-- Judges tend to be a bit more like tyrants than Congress about people leaking, so I doubt they'll ever phrase it like that.

Brookzene said...

The average American adult commits three federal felonies a day.

What's the source for this? Any examples of the kinds of felonies Mr. Suburban Average Middle-class would be committing on a daily basis? I suppose one or more or all of them are the kind of thing you must always be in violation of, every day? Not three new ones?

What is this about, this average American adult felonious lawbreaker? Bet I haven't obstructed justice since I was a teenager.

mccullough said...

Barry Bonds testimony in front of a grand jury was great. The Feds later had him indicted for lying to the grand jury, but the real jury acquitted him. The real jury convicted him for obstruction of justice for a meandering non response to a question. That conviction was overturned on appeal.

Grand juries are a joke. Lying to a grand jury is like lying to Congress or the FBI. What sane person could indict or convict someone for this, especially after Bill Clinton. Grand jurors, like trial jurors, are stacked with retirees and government workers. D.C. grand juries are a joke.

Mueller should take up golf or fly fishing. Better hobby than being a lawyer

Rabel said...

"'According to a source close to the Grand Jury'

How long before that phrase sees print?"


NEW YORK (Reuters) - Grand jury subpoenas have been issued in connection with the June 2016 meeting between Donald Trump Jr., a Russian lawyer and others, two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters on Thursday.

So, about an hour.

mccullough said...

Walsh, Starr, Mueller. All struck out. Comey struck out looking.

Birkel said...

Brookzene:
Since your Googler appears to be broken, I'm gifting you a subscription to Bing.com free of charge.

I don't take assignments. And I'm not trying to cure your ignorance.

Unknown said...

But, but, but Hillary! OMG! Hillary! Why aren't they investigating Hillary!?

Fernandinande said...

Birkel said...
Brookzene: "Any examples of the kinds of felonies Mr. Suburban Average Middle-class would be committing on a daily basis?"

Since your Googler appears to be broken, I'm gifting you a subscription to Bing.com free of charge.


Google tells me pretty clearly that it's a bogus claim.

Mike Sylwester said...

Robert "The FBI White-Washer" Mueller is determined to imprison a scapegoat -- someone like Scooter Libby -- to prove to the public that the FBI's never-ending investigation has been valid and worthwhile.

Mueller and his big crew of Trump-hating lawyers will catch some Trump associate lying about some detail under oath. Then Mueller will threaten that quibbler with a show-trial and a long imprisonment unless he provides evidence that Mueller can use against Trump or against other Trump associates.

Here is Mueller's game plan:

* Concoct an excuse to subpoena Trump's tax returns.

* Leak Trump's tax returns to the public.

* Remove Trump from office.

* Prove to the public that "Crazy Comey the Leaker" was right about Trump.

* Prove to the public that the FBI did everything right.

Mike Sylwester said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike Sylwester said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike Sylwester said...

The existence of the grand jury is supposed to be secret, but this secret information has been leaked to the public.

Who was the leaker?

Consider the following:

* For many years, "Crazy Comey the leaker" has been the protégé of Robert "The FBI White-Washer" Mueller.

* For many years Mueller has been the mentor of Comey.

* When Mueller was FBI Director, the FBI tried to pressure Steven Hatfill in the anthrax by leaking information about the investigation to liberal reporters, most famously to Nicholas Kristof.

* Mueller is conducting himself blatantly like a schemer trying to remove President Trump from office.

Who could the leaker possibly be?

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Frogmarches immanent.

Brookzene said...

I don't take assignments. And I'm not trying to cure your ignorance.

Asking someone for a simple source to an unusual sounding claim made in argument is hardly giving them an assignment - I mean, presuming you aren't totally making the claim up or you don't know yourself why you believe the claim.

I'm pretty sure, as someone said below, google reveals it to be a bogus claim.

I know you won't expect me to pay any attention to your "claims" from now on - unless you source them or otherwise show you want your argument taken seriously. I'll just assume your bullshitting.

Birkel said...

Fernandinande:
And you're wrong. Now what?

Birkel said...

Three Felonies a Day is available through the Amazon portal.

Buy it at no additional cost through the Althouse portal.

You can pay my normal hourly fee to Althouse via her PayPal button.

Bad Lieutenant said...

You can pay my normal hourly fee to Althouse via her PayPal button.


He could if he could afford it.

The Cracker Emcee Activist said...

Given that it's perfectly possible to commit a felony without affecting any other human being in any shape, way, or form, the three felonies a day thing doesn't seem that outrageous.

Birkel said...

Did you attempt to watch a Prince video online?
You are a felon.

mockturtle said...

The book referred to says the average 'professional' commits three felonies a day. Doubtless, professionals are exposed to more felonious possibilities than, say, amateurs.

Birkel said...

And how many people who read Althouse, excepting the retired who used to be professionals, are not professionals? I'd say that number is close to zero, excepting further the paid trolls, if any.

Birkel said...

Note, further, that the Silvergate book was written before the explosion of administrative law the Obama Administration fostered.

William said...

The trick is not to convince the grand jury but rather to convince the American public, more specifically the Trump voters, that Trump did something patently wrong. If the charges look trumped up, it will just serve to create a large and resentful bloc among the American populace.......Nearly everyone was persuaded that Nixon did something wrong. His resignation was accepted by the American public....The Republicans weren't convinced that Reagan had done anything wrong in Iran/Contra, and the Democrats were sure that Clinton's performance with Monica was no big deal andso both men weathered the storm.. ....The prosecution of Trump, at this point anyway, looks vindictive and politically motivated.

sakredkow said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
sakredkow said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fernandinande said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fernandinande said...

Birkel said...
Fernandinande:
And you're wrong. Now what?


You don't know what my google searches returned, so now is your chance to write more silly stuff.

mockturtle said...

I'm glad to see Jay Sekulow will be representing Trump.

Achilles said...

Blogger Brookzene said...

"What's the source for this? Any examples of the kinds of felonies Mr. Suburban Average Middle-class would be committing on a daily basis?"

Selling guns to known straw purchasers of Mexican cartels.

Using the NSA to spy on political opponents.

Taking secure compartmentalized information of of sipper net and putting it on unsecured personal computers.

Knowingly giving access to TS/SCI material to people without proper clearances.

Putting a US citizen in jail to support a lie you told about why an ambassador was killed.

Having said ambassador sell surface to air missiles to al quaeda affiliates.

Trading for a deserter held by an enemy and releasing 5 terrorist leaders without properly notifying congress.

Lying to congress about a deal made with Iran.

Shipping money to Iran without authorization.

Interfering in the Israeli elections.

Taking money from foreign governments and businesses through a personal charity while Secretary of State in exchange for obvious favors and quid pro quo.

Unmasking the names of political opponents caught up in international surveillance and leaking those names to the press.

Achilles said...

Blogger Unknown said...
"But, but, but Hillary! OMG! Hillary! Why aren't they investigating Hillary!?"

We know you people don't give a shit about the rule of law. That is why we will not let you seize power like this.

hombre said...

When I was prosecuting, it was criminal contempt of court to disclose the subject matter of a grand jury investigation or subpoenas thereto. I'd guess that is still the case unless you are a Democrat or, in Mueller's case, a Democrat tool. See: FRCrProc. 6(e)(2)(B).

It was also enethical to begin a grand jury investigation without probable cause to believe a crime had been committed. News coverage of the Trump Jr. meeting do not raise any criminal issues.

hombre said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
hombre said...

Mock turtleneck: "I'm glad to see Jay Sekulow will be representing Trump."

I am an admirer of Sekulow, but he is not a criminal specialist. He should be raising hell about the unlawful disclosures regarding the grand jury proceedings and lawyers for those subpoenaed should demand an investigation into them by DOJ. There are reason for grand jury secrecy relating to protection of witnesses and the integrity of the investigations and federal courts do not recognize reporter/source privilege.

The unlawfulness in opposition to Trump is appalling, as is the failure of the DOJ to oppose it.

Unknown said...

Trump's failure to get a special counsel, or special prosecutor (not sure which it is, sorry, I'm British) to look into Wasserman-Schulz's IT arrangements, Lois Lerner's conduct at the IRS, the "unmasking" for electoral advantage, the breach of the agreement Clinton made about separation of State Department/Clinton Foundation business and several other obvious improprieties is beyond comprehension: doesn't he realise that the Deep State is trying to disable him before he can do any swamp draining? (of which we have seen precious little so far).

Mark said...

Hombre, Andrew McCarthy at National Review seems to disagree with you about Grand Juriea: "Under our law, a grand jury may conduct a probe simply to satisfy itself that no crimes have been committed. That is to say, there is no evidentiary threshold that must be crossed before a grand jury can begin investigating. Contrast that with, for example, a search warrant or an eavesdropping warrant; those investigative techniques may not be used unless a court has first been satisfied that there is probable cause to believe a crime has been committed."

Rusty said...

There's gonna be a lynchin'.
The usual suspects can barely contain themselves.
All weeweed up.
Careful ladies.
The outcome isn't over with the indictment.

Birkel said...

Fernandinande
I know you didn't search "three felonies a day" and see anything on the first page that *proves* Silvergate wrong. You're lying.

Let's not pretend otherwise.

Fernandinande said...

First Birkel the Weasel Boy falsely claimed...
The average American adult commits three federal felonies a day.


Then Birkel the Weasel Boy changed his claim after being corrected...
And how many people who read Althouse, excepting the retired who used to be professionals blah blah


Then Birkel the Weasel Boy restricted the definition of a google search...
I know you didn't search "three felonies a day" and see anything on the first page that *proves* Silvergate wrong. You're lying.


You don't know what I searched for, and who, other than you, Weasel Boy, said anything about the first page?

Since "What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" I wouldn't have responded to your weaselly blather except for the fact I'd researched the claim years ago; it was false then and it's still false and the book title is a misleading advertising blurb.

Chuck said...

hombre said...
Mock turtleneck: "I'm glad to see Jay Sekulow will be representing Trump."

I am an admirer of Sekulow, but he is not a criminal specialist. He should be raising hell about the unlawful disclosures regarding the grand jury proceedings and lawyers for those subpoenaed should demand an investigation into them by DOJ. There are reason for grand jury secrecy relating to protection of witnesses and the integrity of the investigations and federal courts do not recognize reporter/source privilege.

The unlawfulness in opposition to Trump is appalling, as is the failure of the DOJ to oppose it.

I used to be a great admirer of Jay Sekulow. Much less so now; I think his association with Trump is turning Jay into an ordinary liar like Trump himself.

But here's my specific question: Why do you, hombre, presume that the news of a grand jury's having been undertaken somehow means that the DoJ or Special Counsel offices leaked that news? The fact of a grand jury's beginning of activity means that people on the outside can get notice of it, via subpoenas and other legal process emanating from the grand jury. I have not heard a single thing about this grand jury's deliberations. All that I have heard is that there is a grand jury. Which could come from anybody who is being contacted by the grand jury now. People who owe no duty of secrecy whatsoever.

Mark said...

Chuck, that doesn't advance their narrative.

The narrative is about leaks not about publically available information or, in this case, those contacted by the Grand Jury who have no secrecy requirement.

Funny how all these legal experts conveniently forget this stuff. Actually it's sad, because given they claim it cannot be partisanship then it must be aging related cognitive decline.

Fernandinande said...

I'm going to spoil the "Three Felonies" fun with Birkel the Weasel Boy:

I've had a copy of the book for a while.

It doesn't claim that any group of people, or even individuals, commit three felonies a day; the title is misleading and the amazon blurb is dishonest.

My google search consisted of verifying that it's still online.
It's a pdf file of 336 pages and 1473343 bytes.

Rusty said...

I smell tar.